Avoid statement that was misleading by being overly specific:

without -T, the format of the last modification column varies.
Being less specific is actually better because that indicates
to the reader that it's intended for human consumption, and that
trying to parse it programmatically is likely not a good idea.

Issue reported by Jan Stary <hans@stare.cz> on tech.
Patch by me, OK sthen@.

bin/ls/ls.1

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-.\"	$OpenBSD: ls.1,v 1.79 2016/10/24 13:46:58 schwarze Exp $
+.\"	$OpenBSD: ls.1,v 1.80 2026/01/18 14:05:29 schwarze Exp $
 .\"	$NetBSD: ls.1,v 1.14 1995/12/05 02:44:01 jtc Exp $
 .\"
 .\" Copyright (c) 1980, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1994
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
 .\"
 .\"     @(#)ls.1	8.7 (Berkeley) 7/29/94
 .\"
-.Dd $Mdocdate: October 24 2016 $
+.Dd $Mdocdate: January 18 2026 $
 .Dt LS 1
 .Os
 .Sh NAME
@@ -281,8 +281,7 @@ owner (though not for
 .Fl g ) ,
 group,
 size in bytes,
-time of last modification
-.Pq Dq mmm dd HH:MM ,
+date and time or date and year of last modification,
 and the pathname.
 In addition, for each directory whose contents are displayed, the first
 line displayed is the total number of blocks used by the files in the